2018 (8) TMI 1109 - AT - Service Tax

Classification of services - Hiring of backhoe/pay loader siding including mechanical unloading - Hiring of pay-loader for loading or coal wagon at different siding of M/s Western Coal Ltd - Removal of all types of material by hiring of equipment such as HEMM, tippers, loading, transportation and dumping at specified places - whether classified under Transport of Goods by Road Service or otherwise? - Held that - From the record of the appeal, it appears that the matter under consideration is no longer res integra in view of the Hon ble Supreme Court decision in case of Commissioner Central Excise & Service Tax, Raipur V/s Singh Transporters 2017 (7) TMI 494 - SUPREME COURT wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that the activity undertaken by the assessee of transporting of the coal from the pithead of the mines to railway sidings within the mining area is more appropriately classifiable under service head of Transport of Goods by Road Service - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Monetary limit for filing appeal before CESTAT.
2. Application for Review of Order (ROM) based on exclusion clause for classification issues.
3. Classification of services rendered by the respondent assessee.

Issue 1: Monetary limit for filing appeal before CESTAT
The appeal was initially dismissed by the Tribunal due to falling below the prescribed monetary limit for filing appeals before CESTAT, set at more than ?10 Lakhs. The Department's appeal was for an amount of only ?1,89,938, leading to its dismissal as per Litigation Policy guidelines.

Issue 2: Application for Review of Order (ROM) based on exclusion clause for classification issues
The Revenue filed a ROM application citing an exclusion clause from CBEC instructions, stating that appeals falling under 'Classification' or 'refund issues' of legal and recurring nature are not subject to the monetary limit withdrawal rule. The ROM application was considered, and the appeal was restored by the Tribunal through a Final Order.

Issue 3: Classification of services rendered by the respondent assessee
The core issue revolved around determining the classification of services provided by the respondent assessee, M/s Mahakaushal Transport Company. The services included hiring of equipment for loading, transportation, and unloading of materials. The Department contended that the services should be classified as "Cargo Handling Service" instead of "Transport of Goods by Road Service," alleging an evasion of ?1,89,938 in taxes.

The Tribunal analyzed the contract details between the respondent assessee and M/s Western Coal Field, focusing on coal loading and transportation activities. Referring to a Supreme Court decision in a similar case, the Tribunal concluded that transporting coal from pitheads to railway sidings falls under "Transport of Goods by Road Service." Citing the Supreme Court's judgment, the Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, finding no merit in reclassifying the services provided by the respondent assessee.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of services under "Transport of Goods by Road Service" and dismissed the Department's appeal, emphasizing the precedent set by the Supreme Court's decision in a similar context.